Kalamazoo Valley Community College Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
382307720
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kalamazoo, MI, USA
Phone
2694884256
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community or Junior Colleges

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,391,438
Expenses
$916,460
Assets
$35,153,525
Liabilities
$994,804

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALISHA SIEBERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE FOUNDATION)

Highest reported compensation

  • LUTHER MARSHALL WASHINGTON (EX-OFFICIO TRUSTEE): $352,608 total reported compensation
  • BRIAN LUETH (ASSISTANT TREASURER): $187,110 total reported compensation
  • ALISHA SIEBERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE FOUNDATION): $132,352 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The kalamazoo valley community college foundation serves to support and benefit the kalamazoo valley community college, its students, faculty, staff and entities. The foundation strives to be a well recognized, managed, growing, community-based foundation meeting the needs of the college through charitable fund-raising and ethical financial management.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grants to kalamazoo valley community college

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 27.5%; rating input score 27
  • Program expense ratio: 97.8%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.2%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 85.7%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 38.36; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.9%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 27.5% of revenue deployed · 97.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 21 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $896K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $353K · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 27/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.